andersenpa Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 http://jamia.bmj.com/content/early/2011/06/09/amiajnl-2011-000205.abstract Errors associated with outpatient computerized prescribing systems Abstract Objective To report the frequency, types, and causes of errors associated with outpatient computer-generated prescriptions, and to develop a framework to classify these errors to determine which strategies have greatest potential for preventing them. Materials and methods This is a retrospective cohort study of 3850 computer-generated prescriptions received by a commercial outpatient pharmacy chain across three states over 4 weeks in 2008. A clinician panel reviewed the prescriptions using a previously described method to identify and classify medication errors. Primary outcomes were the incidence of medication errors; potential adverse drug events, defined as errors with potential for harm; and rate of prescribing errors by error type and by prescribing system. Results Of 3850 prescriptions, 452 (11.7%) contained 466 total errors, of which 163 (35.0%) were considered potential adverse drug events. Error rates varied by computerized prescribing system, from 5.1% to 37.5%. The most common error was omitted information (60.7% of all errors). Discussion About one in 10 computer-generated prescriptions included at least one error, of which a third had potential for harm. This is consistent with the literature on manual handwritten prescription error rates. The number, type, and severity of errors varied by computerized prescribing system, suggesting that some systems may be better at preventing errors than others. Conclusions Implementing a computerized prescribing system without comprehensive functionality and processes in place to ensure meaningful system use does not decrease medication errors. The authors offer targeted recommendations on improving computerized prescribing systems to prevent errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 http://jamia.bmj.com/content/early/2011/06/09/amiajnl-2011-000205.abstract Errors associated with outpatient computerized prescribing systems Abstract Objective To report the frequency, types, and causes of errors associated with outpatient computer-generated prescriptions, and to develop a framework to classify these errors to determine which strategies have greatest potential for preventing them. Materials and methods This is a retrospective cohort study of 3850 computer-generated prescriptions received by a commercial outpatient pharmacy chain across three states over 4 weeks in 2008. A clinician panel reviewed the prescriptions using a previously described method to identify and classify medication errors. Primary outcomes were the incidence of medication errors; potential adverse drug events, defined as errors with potential for harm; and rate of prescribing errors by error type and by prescribing system. Results Of 3850 prescriptions, 452 (11.7%) contained 466 total errors, of which 163 (35.0%) were considered potential adverse drug events. Error rates varied by computerized prescribing system, from 5.1% to 37.5%. The most common error was omitted information (60.7% of all errors). Discussion About one in 10 computer-generated prescriptions included at least one error, of which a third had potential for harm. This is consistent with the literature on manual handwritten prescription error rates. The number, type, and severity of errors varied by computerized prescribing system, suggesting that some systems may be better at preventing errors than others. Conclusions Implementing a computerized prescribing system without comprehensive functionality and processes in place to ensure meaningful system use does not decrease medication errors. The authors offer targeted recommendations on improving computerized prescribing systems to prevent errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterallsummer Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Well I read what I expected: more or less consistent with hand written scripts. The next step is finding which programs have the least errors, and what fail proofs they have installed that are efficiently preventing these errors. Electronic systems are great but still have a ways to go and are behind other technological advances in some ways. Still I would hate to imagine a world without them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterallsummer Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Well I read what I expected: more or less consistent with hand written scripts. The next step is finding which programs have the least errors, and what fail proofs they have installed that are efficiently preventing these errors. Electronic systems are great but still have a ways to go and are behind other technological advances in some ways. Still I would hate to imagine a world without them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.